Don't start with the Greeks, start with this

Don't start with the Greeks, start with this.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=86K3VXKZSec
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Mmmm I too like to be completely lost at every reference to works, concepts and philosophers that a book references.

>poststructural pragmatism

WEW

Can a true American stan for Canadian Kermit while eschewing pragmatism? More a question for the nationalist-oriented Veeky Forumsizens.

>Can a true American stan for Canadian Kermit while eschewing pragmatism?

What does this sentence mean?

No but seriously Rorty "redpills" (metaphor becoming literal?) the history of western philosophy for those of us who share his "vocabulary". The main characters of the book are Nietzsche, Heidegger, Proust, Orwell, Nabokov, Dickens, Wittgenstein, Davidson, Freud, Hegel, Kant, and Bloom.

grad students hate this man

Why

What's the deal with Rorty anyway?

he tells them its not a worthwhile pursuit

atleast start with like moderns? descartes? if not interested maybe hume then kant? idk

Imagine an analytic philosopher who revered the history of philosophy+literature in place of science and mathematics and also actually took Wittgenstein's advice instead of subtracting the practical heart of his work.

>Big Boys of English Speaking academia
>Singer
The philosophical equivalent of Judge Judy, Singer's self-contradictory pap ("abortion and infanticide are acceptable because these immature humans are incapable or rational preference" vs. "rationality is not a requirement for ethical conduct. Any irrational being will avoid pain, which is why cruelty to animals is unethical", which are flatly contradictory positions). Makes money by writing books that tell Liberals 'doing what you want is A-OK"
A buffoon.
>Chomsky
A decent linguist, his work in every other field is no more (or less) than self-serving rent seeking which he publicly admits that he, himself, does not believe.
Darn good at making a buck of gullible college students, but (unless you are speaking of linguistics, where he is very good) not a big academic.
>Dawkins
A mediocre-at-best scientist who will leave exactly zero mark on actual science, he became popular as a writer of PopSci books. When that income source dried up (because his theories were soundly thrashed by scientists) he switched to a series of popular books trashing what he thinks religious people might believe.
Never was a great thinker, never will be.
>Rorty
A man who counted on his readers having never heard of Gorgias, Rorty took facile rhetoric, relabeled it neopragmatism, and sold it like snake oil.
>Chalmers
About time an actual academic appeared. although, to be fair, while he does a fine job of reminding everyone of the hard problem, he has no answers. Which is no one's fault.
>Dennett
Refuses to use proper terms, mainly to hide that, deep down, he he knows any clear statement of his theories leads to eye-rolling
Not a serious academic.
.
This list is a list of "People that stupid people think are smart"

The reality is the "big boys," are largely unknown and/or unmentioned.

Even in academia, if it's mainstream, it probably sucks.

Rorty and Dennett are infinitely more valuable to recent philosophy than David "state-of-the-debate middle-of-the-road milquetoast-property-dualism panpsychism-is-a-neat-idea-I-guess whoa-what-if-video-games-are-real" Chalmers

>>Singer
>The philosophical equivalent of Judge Judy

>agreeing with ironic bait
Mate, I have bad news

If you think that's ironic bait, I have bad news for you...

If you didn't check the archive, I have bad news for you...again

I still want to know what on earth this is supposed to mean.

trivia: Rorty's wife (Amelie Rorty) was one of the greatest Aristotelian/Platonic critics of the 20th century, her essays are brilliant

there's never enough discussion of rorty here.

there's a nice documentary about rorty where he cries whilst discussing nabokov

What's the name of documentary?

might have been youtube.com/watch?v=86K3VXKZSec

but it might not

she's not dead yet

>mfw this was my first philosophy book

>solidarity
leftist beta cuck

100% accurate

good post, my man

where does one start with rorty, family. pls respond nicely.

Can a true American be an active fanboy/girl of Jordan Peterson while eschewing (philosophical) pragmatism?

samefaggotry

Interesting. Makes one wonder.

With OP

Lol can you link something about Chomsky being full of shit?

>what liberals want to do is to donate almost all their money to effective charities

If you can't find something about this then I feel you wouldn't believe your eyes if you saw his shit exposed.

"It's not my job to educate you!" Some epic shit my fellow tumblrer.

I feel like you know the secrets of the universe but can only tell us them by way of Delphic riddles

bumping for the amusement that is triggered leftists.

Have fun being triggered family.

JBP considers himself a quasi pragmatist

fpbp

Why do that? Continentals keep taking literature into their best works AND are making very interesting approaches to contemporary science without letting behind the work done.

I am really sorry analytics have such a narrow perspective on arts and history.